Dr. Fish posted some of the videos I'm referring to. As I mentioned, they are widely available on youtube. If you're interested, you can check for yourself. It is to be expected that a large conflict involving thousands of people will be revealed somewhat more fully in time, but also distorted by all the parties involved over time. Since there is no trustworthy authority to make any investigation, it will always be a very controversial topic.
Trip, you are basically hallucinating about what you think I've said here, probably because you don't like things I've said elsewhere in the forum recently, which you stated, and these biases are also part of your hallucinations. For example, nowhere in this thread have I claimed facts or special knowledge about controversial topics relating to Tiananmen, precisely because I know it is a very controversial and complex topic. I intentionally presented this info. about the cable as neutrally as I could in the beginning of the thread with some opinions I have from many years of talking to people inside the PRC about the event that is the subject of the cable, and later I spoke about my other opinions with Steve only because he asked directly.
Another part of your hallucination comes from this fixation that you have about why I live in China if it's so bad. This is a nonsensical non sequitur, unless you think it is some kind of evidence that the PRC govt can not be as bad as I claim, or I and other expats wouldn't be here. Your lack of basic understanding of the obviousness that dangerous events can occur in relative close proximity to someone without their knowledge, and therefore without their attention to the associated risks, should be made clear to you by normal experiences in life, or simple historical examples. Most people in NAZI Germany say they were unaware of the death camps, including those in close proximity. Most people in the USSR were unaware of the Gulag Archipelago or its horrors written by Solzhenitzen. Most Americans are blissfully unaware of the size of its prison system and the extensive use of torture by their government worldwide, probably because they don't think they are at risk for such treatment.
People who somehow never heard about the NSA, William Binney, John Kirakou and other whistleblowers were unaware of the risks of using social media until Edward Snowden revealed this in a spectacular way. However many people were aware of those risks before Snowden's reveal. This is an example of varying awareness of objective risks that were not revealed by the authority that could investigate them, but were revealed by a controversial figure using illegal means to do so against a government trying to cover up its own illegal activities. This scenario is common.
Do you not understand that objective risks to one's safety can exist without one being aware of them? Do you not understand that large governments routinely target certain people or groups and create risks for them that do not affect other groups, and that members of at-risk groups and non-risk groups can simultaneously be aware or unaware of these risks to varying degrees, and this awareness can change momentarily throughout time and location for the various groups within the jurisdiction of those countries, all while other groups inside or outside of that government's jurisdiction also have varying levels of changing awareness of the risks?
This means that a group of people in the PRC who are Chinese citizens, such as a religious group, could be at high risk and be aware, while expats could be at zero risk or near-zero risk for the danger experienced by that group, while some of those expats have varying levels of awareness of this risk and most other expats are completely unaware of those risks to that particular citizen group for that particular risk, all while the same variables apply to other citizen and expat groups for a large number of risk scenarios posed by a government such as the PRC?
The upshot of all of this is that your and other people's simple-minded comments that I should leave the PRC if I don't like it, or that I wouldn't be here if there were any risks that are related to the events described in this thread or the other situations I've talked about, are completely irrelevant to the topic. It is just as absurd as saying that someone who complains about police brutality in New York City, but who lives in New York City, is a hypocrite because if there were truly police brutality in New York City as bad as they claim, they would not live there, while also implying anyone else who complains about it would need to change their geographic location before lodging a complaint. Please try and understand how ridiculous this is to say: America, love it or leave it. China, love it or leave it. You are saying basically the same thing.
Hope you have a great New Year party tonight and that you get moved up a few notches on the brain transplant recipient waiting list.